Thread by @ggreenwald

This article - by an anti-Trump liberal journalist - is a great work of investigative reporting. It doesn't mean every claim is proven or that one has to believe each assertion -- I don't -- but it is one of the best attempts yet to grapple with what the USG did on COVID origins.

https://twitter.com/KatherineEban/status/1400403612325515266

Even given my low expectations for the liberal sector of the corporate media, I find it shocking how little coverage they're devoting to Fauci's fascinating email archive.

He's one of the most important officials on the planet over the last 18 months, and yet: virtual silence.

There are divisions on the left over how to treat the lab-leak theory. For those hostile to it, is the argument that:

1) The lab-leak theory is clearly false & COVID is obviously zoonotic; or,

2) The dangers of finding out (fueling a Cold War with China) outweigh the benefits?

Here's an interesting debate between leftists on whether the lab-leak theory, if true, would fuel a Cold War with China given the *US helped fund that research*.

I see validity to both views, but still don't understand if the argument is: it's false or we shouldn't want to know:

I'll just repeat: until COVID origin is known (or we discover it can't be), the lab-leak story is, to me, a censorship and media story:

The combination of USG, corporate media and Silicon Valley claimed a certainty they never had, to the point of *banning* lab-leak questioning.

One thing we do know: the only proven mass bio-terror attack came, says the FBI, from a Fauci-supervised program at a US Army lab: the 2001 anthrax attack, perpetrated (says FBI) by a Fort Detrick scientist working with highly weaponized bacterial agents.

greenwald.substack.com/p/the-fbis-str…

There's so many fascinating and still-unresolved questions about that anthrax attack. As I wrote yesterday, there was pervasive mainstream doubts about the FBI's case.

Also: exactly 1 week before 9/11, NYT ran an article on dangerous US anthrax research:

nytimes.com/2001/09/04/wor…

Meanwhile, in a now-forgotten 2008 @Slate article, long-time DC-based Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen says he was told shortly after 9/11 -- before the anthrax attack -- to carry cipro as an antidote to anthrax.

slate.com/news-and-polit…

The January @NYMag article by Nicolas Baker that helped mainstream the lab-leak theory had a passage discussing Fauci's key role in overseeing anthrax research (for defensive purposes only, he insisted). But that it happened is beyond dispute:

nymag.com/intelligencer/…

The key point is there's no question -- zero -- that both the US and China (and others) create, manipulate and cultivate lethal pathogens in their research labs. They claim it's for defensive, not offensive, purposes, but the leak dangers are the same.

greenwald.substack.com/p/the-fbis-str…

Here's @robbysoave with an excellent article on, what for me, at least as of now, is the key point with the USG/media/tech fraud that allowed lab-leak censorship:

"The Media's Lab Leak Debacle Shows Why Banning 'Misinformation' Is a Terrible Idea"

reason.com/2021/06/04/lab…